Objective Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is a common presenting symptom of COVID‐19 infection. Radiological imaging of the olfactory structures in patients with COVID‐19 and OD can potentially shed light on its pathogenesis, and guide clinicians in prognostication and intervention. Methods PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, SCOPUS were searched from inception to August 1, 2021. Three reviewers selected observational studies, case series, and case reports reporting radiological changes in the olfactory structures, detected on magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, or other imaging modalities, in patients aged ≥18 years with COVID‐19 infection and OD, following preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta‐analyses guidelines and a PROSPERO‐registered protocol (CRD42021275211). We described the proportion of radiological outcomes, and used random‐effects meta‐analyses to pool the prevalence of olfactory cleft opacification, olfactory bulb signal abnormalities, and olfactory mucosa abnormalities in patients with and without COVID‐19‐associated OD. Results We included 7 case–control studies (N = 353), 11 case series (N = 154), and 12 case reports (N = 12). The pooled prevalence of olfactory cleft opacification in patients with COVID‐19 infection and OD (63%, 95% CI = 0.38–0.82) was significantly higher than that in controls (4%, 95% CI = 0.01–0.13). Conversely, similar proportions of cases and controls demonstrated olfactory bulb signal abnormalities (88% and 94%) and olfactory mucosa abnormalities (2% and 0%). Descriptive analysis found that 55.6% and 43.5% of patients with COVID‐19 infection and OD had morphological abnormalities of the olfactory bulb and olfactory nerve, respectively, while 60.0% had abnormal olfactory bulb volumes. Conclusion Our findings implicate a conductive mechanism of OD, localized to the olfactory cleft, in approximately half of the affected COVID‐19 patients. Laryngoscope, 132:1260–1274, 2022

No abstract

BackgroundWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the detection rate (DR) of fluoro-prostate-specific membrane antigen (18F-PSMA-1007) PET/CT in patients with different serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels in the setting of primary staging of prostate cancer (PCa) or biochemically recurring PCa.MethodsA comprehensive electronic literature search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement. This study was registered in the PROSPERO database (registration number: CRD42022331595). We calculated the DR of 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT in PCa.ResultsThe final analysis included 15 studies that described 1,022 patients and 2,034 lesions with 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT in PCa. The DR of 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT in patients with PCa in primary staging ranged from 90% to 100%, with a pooled estimate of 94% (95% CI: 92%–96%). The DR of 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT in patients with PCa in BCR ranged from 47% to 100%, with a pooled estimate of 86% (95% CI: 76%–95%). The DRs of PSA levels >2.0, 1.1–2.0, 0.51–1.0, and ≤0.5 ng/ml detected by 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT in a patient-based analysis were 97% (95% CI: 93%–99%), 95% (95% CI: 88%–99%), 79% (95% CI: 68%–88%), and 68% (95% CI: 58%–78%), respectively.ConclusionThis meta-analysis concluded that 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT had a high application value for prostate cancer, including primary tumors and biochemical recurrence. The DR of 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT was slightly higher in primary prostate tumors than in biochemical recurrence.Systematic Review Registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022331595.

Statins have been proven to be effective in minimizing the risk of cardiovascular adverse events, however, their effect on BP variability is debatable with respect to their significance and their use as a potential anti‐hypertensive. Using a meta‐analysis approach, the aim of this study was to explore whether certain statins have the potential to lower blood pressure (BP). For the period 2002–2022, Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched for the studies that examined the effect of statins on blood pressure in normotensive or hypertensive individuals. Randomized controlled clinical trials that investigated this effect were included based on our inclusion criteria. Our primary outcomes were changes in systolic and diastolic blood pressure (DBP). The final analysis of the study included 49 RCTs involving 45 173 participants randomized to receive either statins or placebo. Among the two groups, the total weighted mean difference (WMD) for systolic blood pressure (ΔSBP) was –1.42 (95% CI: –2.38, –0.46; p = .004) and diastolic blood pressure (ΔDBP) was 0.82 (95% CI: –1.28, –0.36; p = .0005). Despite various studies suggesting the efficacy of statins in blood pressure lowering to be significant and non‐significant both, we observed a decrease in SBP and DBP both, although the change was not as large and could be considered significant. A large multicenter, multi‐ethnic, large sample pool size, and a long period follow‐up study is still required to assert these claims.

No abstract